• About Us
  • Search
  • Compatibility
  • Forums
  • Archive
  • Channels
  • Home
To take full advantage of all features you need to login or register. Registration is completely free and takes only a few seconds.
Warp2Search.net » News » September 2003 » NVIDIA vs. ATI: Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown

NVIDIA vs. ATI: Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown

Posted by: Newsfactory on: 09/05/2003 10:31 PM [ Print | 9 comment(s) ] · 2648 views

Gamers Depot have thrown up a new article called Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown! which looks at the Pixel Shader 2.0 DX9 functionality within a gaming environment! what did we tell you? about Nvidia Cards, ATI bitchslaps Nvidia and they didn't even see it coming or did they? Hehe Half-Life 2 DirectX 9 Performance! Here's a snip.

Who are we to argue with NVIDIA?s wishes? They?ve been insisting that synthetic benchmarks such as 3DMark 2003 don?t reflect actual game play - yesterday we took them up on that in the mobile space, and today we look at the desktop cards. Using a Beta build of Halo (version 1.5) and the newly released Tomb Raider Patch, we?ve been able to provide an early peak at Pixel Shader 2.0 performance ? even 1.1 and 1.4 performance as well.



Who are we to argue with NVIDIA?s wishes? They?ve been insisting that synthetic benchmarks such as 3DMark 2003 don?t reflect actual game play - yesterday we took them up on that in the mobile space, and today we look at the desktop cards. Using a Beta build of Halo (version 1.5) and the newly released Tomb Raider Patch, we?ve been able to provide an early peak at Pixel Shader 2.0 performance ? even 1.1 and 1.4 performance as well.

NVIDIA vs. ATI: Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown


Digg it! Del.icio.us Technorati Furl Google Bookmarks

« PowerColor ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB · NVIDIA vs. ATI: Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown · Fanless Gainward and MSI GeForce FX cards »

Comment

digitalwonderer
Unregistered



#46943 Posted on: 09/05/2003 10:48 PM
Gamers Depot:
I don’t know how anyone could objectively look at the performance we’ve seen in these benchmarks and conclude that a 5900 Ultra is a smarter buying decision than a 9800 Pro – even the 128MB 9800 Pro (as used in the tests here) trumps the lofty 256MB 5900 Ultra. If you’re still “stuck in the past” and think that ATI is plagued with driver issues, than go ahead and keep your head stuck in the sand like an ostrich, buy a 5900 Ultra and then start crying when your pals are smoking your ass in games like Half Life 2 and Halo because they’re running ATI hardware.


And ATi's Patti Mikula, Public Relations Manger, Desktop Products wrote:
"The R300 architecture was built from the ground up for performance in DirectX 9. DX9 instructions map naturally to our hardware, without any tweaking or driver optimizations. This is important, because the vast majority of games out there won't have the benefit of driver optimizations from anyone (unlike certain game benchmarks), because no-one has the engineering resources to spare. Whether you look at brute force (our 8 pipes versus the competitor's 4) or elegance (we can run many shader operations in parallel that our competitor can't) we have a fundamental advantage with our hardware. With more and more DirectX 9 games coming onto the market, the battle will be all about who can run shaders faster and more efficiently. And our shader performance is hugely better. ShaderMark and other tests show shader performance that is three to six times better on ATI's hardware than Nvidia's. This architectural advantage is evident in shipping games like Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness. You will also see this in Half-Life 2 and every DX9 game coming out before the holiday season."


Honest and merciless, just the way the Dig likes it.  8)


Comment

PrOZaC
Unregistered



#46944 Posted on: 09/05/2003 11:03 PM
Thanks digitalwonderboy :p

Check this out too:
"Yes. NV30 class hardware can run the ARB2 path that uses ARB_fragment_program, but it is very slow, which is why I have a separate NV30 back end that uses NV_fragment_program to specify most of the operations as 12 or 16 bit instead of 32 bit."

John Carmack



Comment

MANGRAVY
Unregistered



#46949 Posted on: 09/06/2003 03:04 AM
"Yes. NV30 class hardware can run the ARB2 path that uses ARB_fragment_program, but it is very slow, which is why I have a separate NV30 back end that uses NV_fragment_program to specify most of the operations as 12 or 16 bit instead of 32 bit."

~ Sounds to me like he's using a cheat :) ~

Comment

digitalwonderer
Unregistered



#46950 Posted on: 09/06/2003 05:13 AM
It's an "optimization", you don't want to get the lawyers after you...  ;)

Comment

BetrayerX
Unregistered



#46951 Posted on: 09/06/2003 05:20 AM
IF Carmack said that, he admited he's running a faster GeForce with less image quality.....odd for a guy who has been asking for 128bit colour for ages.

Comment

BetrayerX
Unregistered



#46952 Posted on: 09/06/2003 05:27 AM
Without getting into how much is his NVidia's Early Christmas Bonus (or NECB for short), I have to agree it is not a cheat. That's the developer's decision (no comments about external influences)

What is odd to me is that Carmack has asked for higher colour standards because he says that the actual isplay can be improved with 128 bit colour....and now go with the slow end FP12 paths of the FX.

If you want my hinest opinion, Doom3 benchmarks are going to be more flamed than 3DMark03 since I bet there are going to be 2 sides arguing about which should be the standard, and it's going to be more controversial because this time is not NVidia cheating in the drivers, but the game developers choosing such a rendering path.

Comment

BetrayerX
Unregistered



#46953 Posted on: 09/06/2003 05:29 AM
sorry about the typos....its 12 am here and I'm drunk.

Comment

deez
Unregistered



Posts: 3
Joined: 2002-06-30

#46957 Posted on: 09/06/2003 06:00 PM
Again i stated the obvious when ati first went anal on nvidia with the r350,,,,,"REAL WORLD BENCHES " are you and i playing these games not 3dmark.....so the winner and still champion is ati just accept the penis in your buttocks like men.....

ps-i have gforce 2 32mb and nforce 2 which i love.....nvidia is on a roll with thier cpu chipsets and it is showing on thier vpu cores.The real contest is next generation games.....or the doom 3 engine games cus all these game companies will license from id an d these cards now will be like my g2......get it???

Comment

shaderboy
Unregistered



#46962 Posted on: 09/06/2003 10:34 PM
why do people think that DOOM3 is going to be so huge? The game itself will be average, the engine good. ATI cards will play it fine.
The other thing is people keep saying is that future games will use the DOOM 3 engine. Yes they will, a few will, but not all of them ! more than 90% + wont. Hardly a reason to get an FX is it ??

Warp2Search.net » News » September 2003 » NVIDIA vs. ATI: Desktop GPU DX9 Showdown

Latest News

· FixWin 1.2
· Cobian Backup 10.0.0.521 Beta
· Glint 1.26 (Build 1019)
· Free Audio Converter 1.2.4.88
· System Explorer 2.1.3
· Google Chrome BETA 5.0.356.0
· Virus Effect Remover 3.2.2.26
· Speccy 1.00.125 Beta
· Dropbox 0.8.21 Experimental
· Cobian Backup 10.0.0.519 Beta
· ID3 Renamer 3.0.3
· FakeAlert Stinger 10.1.0.728
· Nvidia Forceware for Windows Vista\Win 7 197.13
· Nvidia Forceware for Windows XP\2000\03 197.13
· EASEUS Data Recovery Wizard - 3 Day Giveaway
· EASEUS Data Recovery Wizard - 3 Day Giveaway
· BitComet 2010.03.18 Beta
· UltraDefrag 4.2.0 RC4 Beta

Community Forum

· CD/DVD burning software
Posted by Philipp

· help Read/write GUID from registry
Posted by joshi

· How to use Driver Robot to update drivers?
Posted by necoleliao

· Scanning website files on the fly
Posted by Alan Connor

· Updated motherboard chipset - Net stopped working
Posted by Soaron


Nodes To Friends





Online Users

There are currently 405 user(s) online:
Ask Jeeves, Google, Live Search, MSN, Yahoo

© 2007-2009 Esselbach Internet Solutions
All products mentioned are registered trademarks or trademarks of their respective owners.
Read our disclaimer over here and our Privacy Policy over here
Managed with Contentteller(R) Business Edition, (C) 2002 - 2009 Esselbach Internet Solutions